I did indeed read the full story and the appeal judges said that the original judge should not have used the phrase 'boy racer' as there was no evidence the driver was speeding.
He tried to overtake on a blind bend but managed to pull back in behind the bus. He then lost control of the vehicle.
He had bought the car 4 days earlier. The car was legal inasmuch as it was insured, taxed and had an MOT. It was found to have defective breaks and a faulty shock absorber which could have contributed to the accident, the defence claimed but the original judge disregarded this.
As I said earlier, we'll have to wait for the report giving the appeal judge's reasons.